Teachers’ Perceptions of the Appropriateness of Teacher ... filevaka çalışması ile alana katkıda bulunmakta ve aynı zamanda öğretmenin deneyim yılının ve öğretme bağlamının

275

Teachers’ Perceptions of the Appropriateness of Teacher Self-Disclosure: A Case Study from Turkey

Öğretmenin Kendini Açması Uygunluğu Konusunda Öğretmen Algıları: Türkiye’den Bir Durum Çalışması

Fidel Çakmak1 ve Betül Arap2

1 Fidel Çakmak, English Language Instructor, The School of Foreign Languages, Mersin University. Email: [email protected] Betül Arap, English Language Instructor, The School of Foreign Languages, Mersin University. Email: [email protected]

AbstractTeacher self-disclosure (TSD) is regarded as a means of increasing student understanding, participation, interest, and motivation. The aim of the present paper is to investigate in-ser-vice and pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the appropriateness of teacher self-disclosure in a Turkish context. It is a replication study of that of Zhang, Shi, Tonelson,&Robinson (2009) and included pre-service teachers (n=76) and in-service teachers (n=60) from Tur-key. The results indicate statistically significant differences within two groups of teachers in their perceptions of the appropriateness of teacher self-disclosure in two areas: com-mon topics and uncommon topics. There were no statistically significant differences in three other dimensions; uncommon purposes, common purposes and consideration of stu-dents. Both studies have yielded similar results in terms of the perceptions of the purpose of teacher self-disclosure and of the inappropriateness of uncommon topics. Contrasting results were found in the appropriateness of common topics of teacher self-disclosure, uncommon purpose and consideration of students. The study contributes to the field as a furtherance of the case study with a sample from Turkey and it implies that the year of experience and teaching context might affect the perceptions of appropriateness of TSD.

Key words: teacher self-disclosure, perception of teacher self-disclosure, appropriateness of teacher self-disclosure

ÖzetBu çalışmanın amacı Türkiye bağlamında “öğretmenin kendini açması” nın (ÖKA) uy-gunluğuna ilişkin, hizmetteki öğretmenlerin ve öğretmen adaylarının algılarını araştır-maktır. Zhang, Shi, Tonelson ve Robinson (2009) tarafından yapılan çalışmanın uyar-laması olan bu çalışma Türkiye’de hizmette olan öğretmenleri (s=60) ve hizmet öncesi öğretmen adaylarını (s=76) kapsamaktadır. Sonuçlara göre, öğretmenlerin ve öğretmen adaylarının kendilerini açmalarının uygunluğuna ilişkin algılarında iki boyutta istatistik-sel açıdan önemli farklılıklar bulunmaktadır: Sıradan konular ve sıra dışı konular. Diğer üç boyutta, sıra dışı amaçlar, sıradan amaçlar ve öğrencileri dikkate alma boyutlarında, iki grup öğretmen arasında istatistiksel olarak önemli farklılıklar bulunmamıştır. Her iki ça-lışma da öğretmenlerin kendilerini açmalarının amacı ve sıra dışı konuların uygunsuzlu-ğuna ilişkin algılarında benzer sonuçlar sunmuştur. Öğretmenlerin kendilerini açmalarına dair sıradan konuların, sıra dışı amaçların ve öğrencileri dikkate alma uygunluğunun bo-yutları açısından iki çalışmada farklı sonuçlar bulunmuştur. Bu çalışma Türkiye’den bir vaka çalışması ile alana katkıda bulunmakta ve aynı zamanda öğretmenin deneyim yılının ve öğretme bağlamının ÖKA’nın uygunluğunun algısını etkileyebileceğini belirtmektedir.

Anahtar sözcükler: öğretmenin kendisini açması, öğretmenin kendisini açması ile ilgili algılama, öğretmenin kendisini açmasının uygunluğu

Journal of Teacher Education and EducatorsÖğretmen Eğitimi ve Eğitimcileri DergisiVolume/Cilt 2, Number/Sayı 2, 2013, 275-288

276

IntroductionTeachers are regarded as one of the crucial components of communication in the

classroom. Research on classroom communication has underlined several aspects of teachers’ teaching and classroom management skills, namely, attitudes, perceptions, and beliefs about the teaching context to have a better understanding of teachers’ per-sonal stances on the job. One of the study areas, teacher self-disclosure, focuses on teachers’ perceptions about personalizing their teaching through self-disclosure. As teachers spend a certain amount of time in the class, they share their personal stories, their sense of humor, and anecdotes in order to enhance students’ motivation, interest, and participation.

Since teacher self-disclosure is used both consciously and unconsciously in the classroom, research into the practice is relevant. Why teachers disclose their personal and professional information, whether they regard such disclosures as relevant to the students’ profile (background, grade level, gender, and so forth) and what kind of top-ics they choose to disclose about themselves in the class are of particular interest. These studies not only contribute to the research field but also provide an opportunity for teachers to better understand the practice of self-disclosure. The present study aims to replicate the study by Zhang et al. (2009) so as to provide information regarding teachers’ perceptions of the appropriateness of self-disclosure with a case study from Turkey and to contribute to the research field by showing the possible differences or similarities in the results between the original and the present study.

Self-disclosure and outcomesSelf-disclosure, in its early definition in communication studies, was linked

to the bipartite level of relationship with others involving the attitudes of love and trust (Jourard, 1971). Proposing a more specific definition, Goldstein and Benassi (1994) defined it as a teacher’s “sharing of their personal and professional informa-tion and experience about himself and herself” (p. 212). It has been also referred to as a kind of message about the self when a person communicates with another being (Wheeless&Grotz, 1976), as a positive feeling of interpersonal solidarity and trust (Wheeless, 1978), and as a barometer of developing closeness between interactants (Taylor, 1979). In the teaching field, studies on teacher self-disclosure (TSD) have mentioned that the feeling of liking is slightly different than that of self-disclosure in the classroom (McCarthy&Schmeck, 1982; Cayanus&Martin, 2004; Lannutti&Strauman, 2006). The former is more “illustrative” than the latter (Lannutti&Strauman, 2006, p.196). In other words, disclosure is a beneficial outcome for the recipient and stems from the discloser’s liking and wanting to initiate a more intimate relationship and, in the exchange of this, the recipient expects to receive the outcome in the form of disclosure.

Studies have also highlighted the functions of TSD such as content clarity

Fidel Çakmak ve Betül Arap

277

(Wambach&Brothen, 1997), building a rapport with the students for the purpose of improving their motivation (Sorensen, 1989; Mazer et al., 2007; Cayanus et al., 2009), their interest (Cayanus et al., 2003) and their participation in classroom tasks (Goldstein&Benassi, 1994). Additionally some of them have included the possible outcomes of TSD demonstrating the effects of TSD on student learning (Hartlep, 2001), on students’ emotional experiences and their evaluations of their teachers (Lannutti&Strauman, 2006), on social interaction in the class (Cayanus&Martin, 2004). In addition to these studies, Connelly&Clandinin (1988) point out a relation be-tween teacher decision making in the curriculum implementation and TSD, claiming that TSD could function as curriculum. In a similar vein, Zhang et al. (2009) suggest examining the appropriateness of TSD in regard with the curriculum implementation with an emphasis on “what teachers can and cannot self-disclose (topics), for what purposes teachers can or cannot self-disclose and what students’ needs the teacher should consider” (p.1118). According to them, it could help teachers to revisit their decisions about what they should or should not discuss in the class, what they should take into account when they use TSD and whether their self-disclosure best serves the students. These considerations are highly likely to affect the curriculum implementa-tion and learning outcomes.

MethodThis present study set out to act as a replication of Zhang et al.’s (2009) study and

to investigate pre-service and in-service teachers’ perceptions of the appropriateness of teacher-self disclosure in the Turkish context; therefore, the researchers employed the same self-report survey.

ParticipantsThe study was conducted in Mersin and Adana, Turkey. Participants consisted of

seventy-six pre-service teachers and sixty in-service teachers. Out of 76 pre-service teachers, 17 (22.3%) were male and 59 (77.7%) were female and they were enrolled in teacher education programs at Mersin and Çukurova University. Out of 60 in-service teachers with more than five years of experience, 11 (18.3%) were male, who pos-sess an average of 12 years of experience, and forty-nine (81.7%) were female, who possess an average of 11.7 years of experience, and they are all currently working at secondary and high schools in Mersin and Adana, Turkey.

InstrumentBased on existing literature reviews and a certain theoretical framework, the sur-

vey, ‘The Appropriateness of Teacher Self-Disclosure Scale’ (see Appendix), was de-veloped and used by Zhang et al. (2009). Since this was a replication study, the same scale was employed as a data collection instrument in this study. It involves 20 items

Journal of Teacher Education and Educators/ Öğretmen Eğitimi ve Eğitimcileri Dergisi

278

that aim to measure the US pre-service and in-service teachers’ attitudes towards three domains: topics, purposes and considerations. Under those three domains, there are five dimensions that are subsets of the domains. The first dimension, ‘Common top-ics’, comprises five items: personal experiences/stories, information related to their family, relatives and friends, personal opinions and personal interests or hobbies. The second dimension, ‘Uncommon topics’, comprises three items: political perspectives, religious beliefs and information from teachers’ intimate relationships. The third di-mension, ‘Common purposes’, comprises seven items: to offer real-world practical ex-amples, to attract students’ attention, to create positive teacher–student relationships, to set social role models, to create a class environment comfortable for students, to enhance student learning interests and to clarify teaching content. The fourth dimen-sion, ‘Uncommon purposes’, comprises two items: to entertain their students and to please the teachers themselves. The fifth dimension, ‘Consideration of students’, com-prises four items: consideration of students’ cultural background, grade level, gender and emotional status. The survey also includes a five-point Likert scale (ranging from 1, ‘Very inappropriate’, to 5, ‘Very appropriate’). The response of 5, as the highest value, means ‘Very appropriate’, indicating the most acceptable TSD (Teacher Self-Disclosure), whereas the response of 1, as the lowest value, means ‘Very inappropri-ate’, indicating the least acceptable TSD.

The Cronbach Alpha value was recalculated for 20 items in the scale (α = .81). As for the validity of the scale, the Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation of the items was conducted to analyze the results for the 20-item scale and compare the factor loadings of the appropriateness of TSD scale with the loadings given in Zhang et al.’s study. The items loaded on a component mostly remained similar to the original study. In the original study, five dimensions with eigenvalues over 1.00, accounting for 61% of the total variance were identified. Seven items (#9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #16) were loaded on the first component, common purposes; four items (#17, #18, #19, #20) were loaded on the second component, consideration of students; three items (#2, #3, #5) were loaded on the third component, uncommon topics; two items (#5, #15) were loaded on the fourth component, uncommon purposes and four items (#1, #4, #6, #7) were loaded on the fifth component, common topics. In the present study, the researchers found five broad factors and eigenvalues to be over 1.00, containing 83% of the total variance. Seven items (#9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #16) were loaded on the first component. Two items (#4, #7) were loaded on the second component, four items (#17, #18, #19, #20) were loaded on the third component. Two items (#2, #3) were loaded on the fourth component. Three items (#1, #5, #6) were loaded on the fifth component.

Data CollectionThe survey was sent to 70 in-service teachers through e-mail. 60 of them respond-


279

ed, which shows a response rate of 86%. In order to reach a larger number of partici-pants more conveniently, the questionnaire was also uploaded to a website to send the scale online without any postage. The link of the website was sent to the teachers to inform them about the research and the scale. As for pre-service teachers, the instru-ment was distributed at Mersin University just before they had their ELT course. It took approximately fifteen minutes for them to complete the scale. The participation in the study was voluntary.

Data AnalysisThe five dimensions of TSD comprised ‘Common topics’, ‘Uncommon topics’,

‘Common purposes’, ‘Uncommon purposes’ and ‘Consideration of students’. These dimensions were similar to the study of Zhang et al. (2009) and the corresponding values of those dimensions were calculated according to the loadings of the items under these dimensions. Five independent-samples t-tests were conducted to evaluate the assumption that pre-service and in-service teachers differed in their perceptions of the appropriateness of TSD. Means and standard deviations for each dimension were reported to indicate different degrees of the perceived appropriateness of each dimen-sion of TSD. Levene’s test was conducted to evaluate the assumption that the variances for two groups were equal.

However, prior to conducting any analysis of the data, the outliers were checked and eliminated (Field, 2005). In addition to this, in order to sustain the normal distri-bution assumption of independent t-test, the data had to be corrected by using SQRT (6-X) transformation.

To control overall Type I error, Bonferroni adjustment at alpha level was applied, which resulted in .01 alpha level. After the transformations, the results of Levene`s test indicated that for the transformed data of ‘Common topics’, ‘Uncommon topics’, ‘Common purposes’, and ‘Consideration of students’, the variances in the groups were equal [F(1,134) =3.026, p=.084; F(1,134) =0.014, p=.906; F(1,134) =4.026, p=.047; F(1,134) =0.012, p=.912, respectively]. However, due to the fact that the significance of values of Levene`s test for the dimension of ‘Uncommon purposes’ were less than 0.01, t value for unequal variance was reported.

ResultsMeans and standard deviations of the pre-service and in-service teachers` percep-

tions of five dimensions of the appropriateness of TSD are reported in Table 1.


280

Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the appropriateness of TSD

As seen from the table, in-service teachers reported higher means than pre-service teachers in the dimension of ‘Common topics’ and ‘Uncommon purposes’. On the other hand, pre-service teachers reported higher means than in-service teachers in the dimension of ‘Uncommon topics’, Common purpose’ and ‘Consideration of students.’ In order to compare the means of the two groups of teachers’ perceptions of appro-priateness of the five dimensions, five independent samples t-tests were conducted. The results of the t-tests indicated that there were statistically significant differences between pre-service teachers and in-service teachers, in their perceptions of appropri-ateness of ‘Common topics’, t(134) = -2.909, p<.01, with small effect size (d=0.2); and ‘Uncommon topics’ t(134)=3.434, p<.01, with medium effect size (d=0.2). Moreover, the results showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups of teachers in their perceptions of appropriateness of ‘Common purposes’ [t(134) =0.275, p>.01], ‘Uncommon purposes’ [t (104.723) =-1.998, p>.01] and ‘Consideration of stu-dents’ [t (134) = 0.506, p>.01].

This study has yielded different results than Zhang et al.’s (2009) study except for two similar results. Both of the studies found a significant difference between the two groups of teachers in their perceptions of the appropriateness of uncommon purposes. Like Zhang et al.’s study, this study found that there was no significant difference be-tween the two groups of teachers in their perceptions of common topics. However, in Zhang et al.’s study, the difference between the two groups in their perceptions of un-common purpose and considerations of students was found to be significant, whereas in this study, it was found insignificant. In addition to this, the difference between the two groups of teachers in their perceptions of appropriateness of common topics was found to be insignificant in Zhang et al.’s study. Contrarily, it was found significant in this study.

DiscussionAs some pre-existing studies (Gregory, 2005; Zhang et al., 2007) have shown,

both pre-service and in-service teachers agree on which of the seven purposes of TSD

Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the appropriateness of TSD

Pre-service teachers In-service teachers

M SD M SD

Common topics 1.50 0.16 1.59 0.19

Uncommon topics 1.50 0.25 1.35 0.26

Common purpose 1.36 0.16 1.35 0.20

Uncommon purpose 1.55 0.20 1.63 0.27

Consideration of students 1.45 0.23 1.43 0.23


281

are appropriate. These are to create positive teacher-student relationships, to clarify learning materials, to enhance students’ learning interests, to offer real-world practi-cal examples, to create a positive class environment for students, to attract students’ attention, and to set social models. This means that both groups of teachers are aware of potential and function of TSD. It also indicates that TSD has some implications out of the classroom context, creating social models for students. As pointed out by Zhang et al. (2009), teachers wisely use their power and potential to bridge the gap between school and society by setting social models and demonstrating teacher leadership. The teachers might disclose their personal or professional information to help students to have a better understanding of the society they live in through the interaction in the class. Additionally, unlike in-service teachers, pre-service teachers showed a higher level of unacceptance of the uncommon topics such as political perspectives, religious beliefs, and information about their intimate relationships. They found these topics uncommon and inappropriate to disclose. This finding is also consistent with the repli-cated study. It shows that pre-service teachers are more cautious and they avoid talking about intimate relationships or issues such as religion and political perspectives. These may be related to the social norms or taboos which pre-service teachers, as the young generation of society, might be more exposed to.

The finding about the common topics deviates from the replicated study. In-ser-vice teachers having higher means for TSD topics than pre-service teachers shows that experienced teachers are more predisposed to employ teachers’ personal experiences/stories, information related to their family, relatives and friends, personal opinions, and personal interests or hobbies. This might indicate that as pre-service teachers are not in service yet, they might have a relatively narrow view of TSD topics to be dis-closed. It is sensible to consider that the more a teacher teaches in the class, the more he or she is aware of the instructional means for teaching. Another contrasting find-ing is that pre-service teachers showed a lower degree of acceptance for uncommon purposes, which might stress the possibility that pre-service teachers might be more focused on the phases of teaching and on fulfilling the activities in the lesson plan and so avoid the idea of entertainment or amusement.

As a final contrasting point, the finding about the consideration of students de-viates from the replicated study. This deviation may depend on the number of par-ticipants in the case study as well as on the difference in the research context. What constitute crucial considerations for a student are relative to the environment where the research is conducted; such perceptions about the consideration of students might not be fixed or global.

Conclusion and ImplicationThe present study as a furtherance of Zhang et al.’s (2009) provides a contribution

to TSD studies with quantitative evidence from a Turkish context. It has been found out


282

that pre-service and in-service teachers differ in their perceptions of appropriateness of common topics, uncommon purposes and uncommon topics. The findings suggest that both groups of teachers are conscious about the purpose of TSD and consideration of student characteristics and diversity in the class. The fact that they differ in common topics, uncommon purposes and topics might reflect that pre-service teachers are not in service yet; therefore, they might have a very focused and rigid way of teaching. For consideration of students and common purposes, it could be stated that teachers are aware of why they employ TSD. This might go in parallel with the awareness of what to do in the class as a part of curriculum implementation.

The present study offers two basic implications. Firstly, the difference in in-ser-vice and pre-service teachers’ perceptions of appropriateness of TSD implies that ex-perience in the field might affect the perceptions of common and uncommon topics. As experienced teachers spend time in actual teaching, they might have a broader vision of means for self-disclosure. Secondly, the teacher education programs might be influ-encing attitudes towards TSD in students entering the field of teaching as they set prin-ciples of what teachers are supposed to do in the class. Therefore, pre-service training experiences could be investigated in relation to TSD. Further studies could be carried out to investigate students’ perceptions of their classroom teachers’ self-disclosure. This would provide a more complete picture by considering both self-disclosure func-tions in the classroom and students’ observation or evaluation of TSD.

LimitationsTwo limitations of this present study need to be acknowledged. The first limitation

is related to the number of participants. A larger sample could be reached to yield more sound results in terms of general validity. The second limitation could be the division of in-service teachers as teachers working at K-12 as teaching context might affect the perceptions of the teachers about the appropriateness of TSD.

Özet

GirişÖğretmenlerin sınıf içi etkili iletişimin önemli öğelerinden biri olduğu bilinmek-

tedir. Sınıf içi iletişim üzerine yapılan araştırmalar öğretmenlerin öğretim ve sınıf yönetimi becerilerinin çeşitli yönlerini ortaya koymuştur. Bunlar öğretmenlerin mes-leklerinde kişisel duruşlarını daha iyi anlayabilmelerine yönelik tutum, algı ve öğre-time ilişkin inançlarıdır. Öğretmenin kendisini açması (ÖKA), öğretimi kişiselleştir-melerine ilişkin öğretmen algıları üzerinde yoğunlaşan çalışma alanlarından biridir. Öğretmenler sınıfta geçirdikleri süre boyunca öğrencilerin katılımlarını sağlamak için kişisel hikâyeler ya da anekdotlar anlatıp espri yaparlar.

Öğretmenler sınıfta farkında olarak veya olamayarak kendilerini öğrencilere açar-


283

lar. Öğretmenlerin kişisel ya da profesyonel bilgilerini neden paylaştıkları, bu payla-şımların öğrencilerin profillerine ne kadar uyduğu ve kendileriyle ilgili hangi konuları paylaştıkları merak edilenler arasındadır. Bu çalışmalar sadece araştırma alanına katkı sağlamakla kalmaz aynı zamanda öğretmenlere kendilerini açma uygulamalarını daha iyi anlayabilmeleri için de fırsat tanır. Bu çalışma, Zhang ve arkadaşlarının (2009) çalışmasını uyarlayarak Türkiye’den bir vaka çalışması ile öğretmenlerin kendilerini açmalarının uygunluğuna ilişkin algıları hususunda bilgi sağlamayı ve orijinal çalışma ile mevcut çalışma arasında olası farklılıkları veya benzerlikleri göstererek araştırma alanına katkı sağlamayı amaçlamaktadır.

Kendini açma, iletişim çalışmalarındaki ilk tanımıyla, diğer insanlarla sevgi ve gü-ven tutumlarını içeren iki yönlü iletişim seviyesine bağlıdır (Jourard, 1971). Kişi bir baş-kasıyla iletişim halindeyken kendisiyle alakalı bir çeşit mesaj verir (Wheeless&Grotz, 1976), bu mesaj kişilerarası dayanışma, güven duygusu veren (Wheeless, 1978) ve yakınlığı ilerleten bir “barometre” (Taylor, 1979) olarak tanımlanabilinir. Goldstein ve Benassi (1994) kendini açmayı “öğretmenin kendisiyle ilgili kişisel ve profesyonel bilgilerini paylaşması” şeklinde ifade etmiştir (s. 212).

Çalışmalar ÖKA’nın işlevlerini, içeriğin anlaşılırlığını (Wambach&Brothen, 1997), öğrencilerin motivasyonlarını (Sorensen, 1989; Mazer ve diğ., 2007; Cayanus ve diğ., 2009), ilgilerini (Cayanus ve diğ., 2003) ve sınıf etkinliklerine katılımlarını (Goldstein&Benassi, 1994) arttırmak amacıyla öğrencilerle kurulan yakın ilişki ola-rak vurgulamıştır. Ayrıca çalışmalardan bazıları ÖKA’nın olası sonuçlarını ÖKA’nın öğrencilerin öğrenmeleri (Hartlep, 2001), duygusal deneyimleri, öğretmen değerlen-dirmeleri (Lannutti&Strauman, 2006; McCarthy&Schmeck, 1982) ve sınıf içi sosyal etkileşimi (Cayanus&Martin, 2004) üzerindeki etkilerini göstererek sunmuştur. Bu ça-lışmalara ek olarak, Connelly&Clandinin (1988), ÖKA’nın eğitim programı gibi işlev göreceğini belirterek eğitim programının uygulanmasında öğretmenin karar vermesi ve ÖKA arasında bir ilişki olduğunu savunmuştur. Benzer biçimde, Zhang ve arka-daşları (2009) “öğretmenlerin paylaşabilecekleri veya paylaşamayacakları konuları, hangi amaçlarla paylaşabilecekleri veya paylaşamayacakları, öğrencilerin bu konu-daki ihtiyaçlarının ne olduğunun dikkate alınması” vurgusuyla eğitim programının uygulanmasına ilişkin ÖKA’nın uygunluğunun incelenmesini önermiştir. Böylelikle, öğretmenler ÖKA’yı kullandıklarında neye dikkat etmeleri gerektiğine ve kendilerini açmalarının öğrencilerin işine yarayıp yaramadığına ilişkin kararları daha sağlıklı göz-den geçirebileceklerdir.

YöntemBu çalışma Zhang ve arkadaşlarının (2009) çalışmasının temel alındığı bir uyar-

lama çalışmasıdır ve bu araştırmacıların kullandığı ölçek (Öğretmenin Kendini Açma Uygunluğu Ölçeği) veri toplama aracı olarak temel alınmıştır (Field, 2005). Araştırma, Türkiye’nin Adana ve Mersin illerinden 76 hizmet öncesi öğretmen adayı ve 60 hiz-


284

metteki öğretmen olmak üzere toplamda 136 öğretmen ile yürütülmüştür.

BulgularHizmetteki öğretmenlerin sıradan konular ya da sıra dışı amaç kategorilerinde

ÖKA’dan yararlanmaları noktasında hizmet öncesi öğretmen adaylarına göre daha yüksek bir ortalamaya sahip oldukları tespit edilmiştir. Diğer yandan, hizmet önce-si öğretmen adaylarının ÖKA’dan yararlanma noktasında sıra dışı konularda, sıradan amaç ve öğrencileri dikkate alma kategorilerinde daha yüksek bir ortalamaya sahip oldukları tespit edilmiştir. İki grubun beş boyut (sıradan konular, sıra dışı konular, sıra dışı amaçlar, sıradan amaçlar ve öğrencileri dikkate alma) uygunluk anlayışının ortalamalarını karşılaştırmak için, beş bağımsız t-testi yapılmıştır. T-testi sonuçları sı-radan konuların uygunluğu [t(134) = -2.909, p<.01] ve sıra dışı konular [t(134)=3.434, p<.01] algısında iki grup arasında istatistiksel olarak önemli fark olduğunu ortaya koy-muştur. Buna rağmen, sonuçlarda sıradan amaçlar, sıra dışı amaçlar ve öğrencileri dik-kate alma boyutlarında istatistiksel olarak önemli fark ortaya çıkmamıştır.

Bu çalışma Zhang ve diğerlerinin (2009) sonuçlarıyla iki benzer sonuç dışında farklılık göstermektedir. Her iki çalışma da iki grup öğretmenin sıra dışı amaçlar uy-gunluğunun algısında istatistiksel olarak önemli fark bulunduğunu ortaya koyarken, aynı zamanda, bu iki grubun sıradan konular algıları arasında önemli fark olmadığını ortaya koymuştur. Fakat Zhang ve diğerlerinin çalışması sıra dışı amaçlar ve öğrenci-leri dikkate alma algılarında önemli farklılık ortaya koyarken, bu çalışmada belirtilen boyutlarda iki grubun ortalamalarında istatistiksel olarak önemli bir fark gözlenme-miştir.

TartışmaMevcut çalışmalar (Gregory, 2005; Zhang ve diğ., 2007) gösteriyor ki, hem hizmet

öncesi öğretmen adayları hem de hizmet veren öğretmenlerin ÖKA’yı tercih etmele-rinin yedi nedeni konusunda aynı fikirdedirler. Bu nedenler olumlu öğretmen-öğrenci ilişkisi yaratmak, öğrenme materyallerini anlaşılır hale getirmek, öğrencilerin öğren-me ilgilerini arttırmak, yaşamdan örnekler sunmak, olumlu sınıf ortamını sağlamak, öğrencilerin dikkatini çekmek ve sosyal modeller oluşturmaktır. Bu demek oluyor ki her iki grup da ÖKA’nın işlevinin farkındadır. Zhang ve arkadaşlarına (2009) göre öğ-retmenler sosyal modeller oluşturarak ve öğrencilerini yönlendirerek okul ve toplum arasında köprü kurabilmek için güçlerini ve potansiyellerini bilinçli olarak kullanır-lar. Öğretmenler sınıf içi etkileşim aracılığıyla öğrencilerin içinde yaşadıkları toplumu daha iyi anlayabilmeleri için kişisel ve profesyonel bilgilerini paylaşabilirler. Buna ek olarak hizmet veren öğretmenlerin aksine, öğretmen adayları politik görüş, dini inançlar ve yakın/özel ilişkiler hakkındaki bilgiler gibi sıra dışı konuların paylaşımını yüksek seviyede benimsememişler ve bu konuları sınıfta öğrencilerle paylaşmayı uy-gunsuz bulmuşlardır. Bu bulgu uyarlanmış çalışma ile uyumludur. Bu bulgu öğretmen


285

adaylarının yakın/özel ilişkiler ve din ya da politik görüşler gibi meseleleri konuşma konusunda daha dikkatli olduklarını ve bu bilgileri paylaşmaktan kaçındıklarını gös-termektedir. Bu durum toplumun yeni nesli olan öğretmen adaylarının maruz kaldıkla-rı sosyal normlar ve tabularla alakalı olabilir.

Sıra dışı konular uyarlanmış çalışmayla farklılık göstermektedir. Hizmet veren öğretmenlerin ÖKA konularında ortalamalarının öğretmen adaylarından yüksek olma-sı gösteriyor ki deneyimli öğretmenler kişisel deneyimlerine/hikâyelerine, hobilerine, kişisel fikirlerine ya da ilgi alanlarına, akrabalarına, arkadaşlarına ve ailelerine ilişkin bilgilere derslerde daha çok yer veriyorlar. Bu durum öğretmen adaylarının henüz öğ-retmenlik mesleğine başlamadıklarından ÖKA konularına daha kapalı durabilecekle-rini gösterebilir. Bir öğretmen sınıfta ne kadar öğretirse, öğretme yöntemleriyle ilgili farkındalığının o kadar arttığını düşünmek doğru olur. Diğer farklı bir bulgu ise öğ-retmen adaylarının sıra dışı amaçlar için kabul derecesinin düşüklüğünü gösterir. Bu durumda öğretmen adaylarının, öğretimin evrelerine ve ders planındaki etkinlikleri tamamlamaya daha çok odaklanma ve öğretimi keyifli kılma fikrini göz ardı etme ola-sılığının varlığından söz edilebilir.

Son olarak öğrencileri dikkate alma konusundaki bulgu uyarlanmış çalışmadan farklılık göstermektedir. Bu farklılık vaka çalışmasındaki katılımcıların sayısının yanı sıra araştırma bağlamındaki farklılıktan kaynaklanabilir. Bir öğrenciye dair önemli dü-şüncelerin ne olduğu araştırmanın yürütüldüğü çevreye göre değişmekle birlikte öğ-rencileri dikkate alma konusundaki gibi algılar durağan ya da geniş çaplı olmayabilir.

SonuçBu çalışma Zhang ve arkadaşlarının (2009) çalışmasının bir uyarlaması olarak

Türkiye bağlamından nicel kanıtlarla ÖKA araştırmalarına bir katkı sağlamıştır. Bu çalışmayla hizmet öncesi öğretmen adayları ve hizmetteki öğretmenler arasında sı-radan konular, sıra dışı amaçlar ve sıra dışı konuların uygunluğu noktasındaki algıla-rında farklılık olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bulgular her iki grubun da ÖKA’nın amaçları-nın, öğrencileri dikkate alma gerekliliğinin ve sınıftaki çeşitliliğin farkında oldukları sonucunun altını çizmektedir. Ortak konularda, sıra dışı amaç ve sıra dışı konularda sonuçların farklılık göstermesi, hizmet öncesi öğretmen adaylarının henüz hizmette olmayışlarından, daha plan odaklı ve öğretme işine sabit bir bakışları olabileceğinden kaynaklanabilir. Öğrencileri dikkate almada ve sıradan amaçlarda ise öğretmenlerin ÖKA’yı kullanma nedenleri konusunda farkındalıklarının olduğu ileri sürülebilir. Bu sonuç da eğitim programının bir parçası olarak sınıfta ne yapılması gerektiğinin daha açık planlanması gerektiğine dikkat çekmektedir.


286

ReferencesCayanus, J. L., Martin, M. M.&Weber, K. D. (2003). The relationships between teach-

er self-disclosure with out-of-class communication, student interest, and cognitive learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern States Communi-cation Association, Birmingham, AL, April.

Cayanus, J. L.&Martin, M. M. (2004). An instructor self-disclosure scale. Communi-cation Research Reports, 21, 252-263.

Cayanus, J. L., Goodboy, A. K.&Martin, M. M. (2009). The relation between teacher self-disclosure and student motives to communicate. Communication Research Reports, 26(2), 105-113.

Connelly, F. M.&Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of experience. New York: Teachers College Press.

Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics using SPSS. London: Sage Publications. Goldstein, G. S.&Benassi, V. A. (1994). The relation between teacher self-disclosure

and student classroom participation. Teaching of Psychology, 21, 212-216.Gregory, L. D. (2005). Influence in the classroom: Exploring instructor self-disclosivecommunication and student outcomes in higher education. Unpublished doctoral dis-

sertation. University of Miami, Coral Gables.Hartlep, K. (2001). Self-reference and instructor self-disclosure: Is gossip easier to remember? The Online Journal of Teaching and Learning in the CSU. Retrieved

from http://www.exchangejournal.org. on 3.1. 2012. Jourard, S. M. (1971) Self-disclosure: The experimental investigation of the transpar-

ent self. New York: Wiley.Lannutti, P. J.&Strauman, E. C. (2006). Classroom communication: The influence of

instructor self-disclosure on student evaluations. Communication Quarterly, 54, 89-99.

Mazer, J. P., Murphy, R. E.&Simonds, C. J. (2007). I’ll see you on Facebook: The effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affec-tive learning, and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56, 1-17.

McCarthy, P. R.&Schmeck, R. R. (1982). Effects of teacher self-disclosure on student learning and perceptions of teacher. College Student Journal, 16, 45-49.

Sorensen, G. (1989). The relationship among teachers’ self-disclosive statements, stu-dents’ perceptions, and affective learning. Communication Education, 38, 259-276

Taylor, D. A. (1979). Motivational bases. In G. J. Chelune (Ed.), Self-disclosure: Ori-gins, patterns, and implications of openness in interpersonal relationships (pp. 110-151). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wambach, C.&Brothen, T. (1997). Teacher self-disclosure and student classroom par-ticipation revisited. Teaching of Psychology, 24, 262-263.

Wheeless, L. R. (1978). A follow-up study of the relationships among trust, disclosure


287

and interpersonal solidarity. Human Communication Research, 4, 143-157.Wheeless, L. R.&Grotz, J. (1976). Conceptualization and measurement of reported

self-disclosure. Human Communication Research, 2, 338-346.Zhang, S., Shi, Q., Tonelson, S.&Allen, D. (2007). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions

of appropriateness of teacher self-disclosure. Paper presented at the 5th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Education. Hawaii, Honolulu, 5-8 January.

Zhang, S., Shi, Q., Tonelson, S.&Robinson, J. (2009). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ perceptions of appropriateness of teacher self-disclosure. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 1117-1124.


288 9

Appendix: Teacher Self-Disclosure Scale and the Questionnaire THE QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear participant, This questionnaire (Zhang et al., 2009) is designed to investigate your perceptions of appropriateness of teacher self- disclosure (TSD)*. Your responses will be kept confidential. Thank you very much for your participation in advance! * TSD (Teacher Self-disclosure): A teacher’s sharing of personal and professional information and experience about himself/herself Fidel Çakmak & Betül Arap Mersin University School of Foreign Languages

1. Please select your gender. Female Male

2. Please select your current role in education.

Pre-Service In-service

3. Please state how many years of experience in teaching you possess (if any) 4. Please respond to the following statements to reflect how appropriate you think those teacher self-disclosure (TSD) behaviors are by circling only one number for each statement.

1 means TSD is very inappropriate (VI), 2 means that TSD is inappropriate (IA), 3 means that TSD is undecided (UND), 4 means TSD is appropriate (A), and 5 means TSD is very appropriate (VA).

VI IA UND A VA (A) Topics 1. Teachers use their personal experiences/stories as TSD topics. 1 2 3 4 5 2. Teachers use their political perspectives as TSD topics. 1 2 3 4 5 3. Teachers use their religious belief as TSD topics. 1 2 3 4 5 4. Teachers use the information related to their family, relatives and friends as TSD topics. 1 2 3 4 5 5. Teachers use information from their intimate relationships as TSD topics. 1 2 3 4 5 6. Teachers use their personal opinions as TSD topics. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Teachers use their personal interests or hobbies as TSD topics. 1 2 3 4 5 (B) Purposes VI IA UND A VA 8. Teachers use TSD to entertain their students. 1 2 3 4 5 9. Teachers use TSD to offer real-world, practical examples. 1 2 3 4 5 10. Teachers use TSD to attract students’ attention. 1 2 3 4 5 11. Teachers use TSD to create positive teacher–student relationships. 1 2 3 4 5 12. Teachers use TSD to set social role models. 1 2 3 4 5 13. Teachers use TSD to create a class environment comfortable to students. 1 2 3 4 5 14. Teachers use TSD to enhance students’ learning interests. 1 2 3 4 5 15. Teachers use TSD to please themselves. 1 2 3 4 5 16. Teachers use TSD to clarify teaching content. 1 2 3 4 5 (C) Consideration of students 17. Teachers consider their students’ grade levels. 1 2 3 4 5 18. Teachers consider their students’ cultural backgrounds. 1 2 3 4 5 19. Teachers consider their students’ gender. 1 2 3 4 5 20. Teachers consider their students’ feelings. 1 2 3 4 5


Documents

Teachers’ Perceptions of the Appropriateness of Teacher ... filevaka çalışması ile alana katkıda bulunmakta ve aynı zamanda öğretmenin deneyim yılının ve öğretme bağlamının